The special meeting of the Town Council was to discuss capitol expenditures and debt financing. In contrast to the last regularly scheduled meeting which found the council chamber packed, this meeting had approximately 15 people in attendance; this number included departmental heads and representatives, political candidates, reporters and private citizens. There was only one period for public comment at the start, and as no summary of the proposed capital expenditures was made available to the public, the only issue addressed during this portion came from supporters of the tennis court reconstruction project.
The logistical plans for this meeting, discussed at the last council meeting, involved having a white board available so that projects and expenditures could be laid out in public view. This led to speculation that the meeting was going to be one of substance rather than form, but unfortunately this was not the case. Instead, the meeting took on the air of performance art. The drama offered came from both sides of the dais as residents, departmental heads, and council representatives postured to support their particular projects.
Three participants failed to offer either hyperbole or drama during the course of the meeting. Roger Marchese, who spoke on behalf of the tennis court project, provided a very brief review of the situation, and included in his public session statement an endorsement of the project. The departmental head of the Oakland DPW, Anthony Marcucilli, was invited to address the council on projects impacting the Department of Public Works. The DPW representative spoke succinctly on one project which impacts how trucks are maintained and involves state mandated procedures. Frank Di Pentima, facing re-election for Council, also failed to offer any dramatic elements to his comments on the fiscal properties of various projects. The same could not be said about many others offering comments on proposed capitol expenditures.
The Recreation Commissioner tried to break down the cost of the tennis court project to a per person level. This accounting technique, which can offer up numbers that equal a dollar and change, did not appear to add any value or clarification to the debate. The Fire Chief, whose volunteer department already saves the town millions of dollars, upped the ante by applying a formula that showed a few more million in savings while seeking council approval for firehouse improvements. The Police Chief, seeking funds for building improvements, sought kudos for his department’s fiscal responsibility by noting how they saved the town $1,300 for a dispatcher’s chair. It was necessary for him to explain that the chair is not a high tech communications center, but a regular office chair described as “an intensive use chair”. The chair was ultimately donated to the town, and the Council did offer kudos.
On the Council side, Mayor Szabo and Council member Pignatelli offered their own dramatic dispensations from the dais. The Council member, while promoting investment in the DPW facilities, described the working conditions as “abominable” and compared it to working in a “dungeon”. The patriarch of the council, Mayor Szabo, lamented on the Council consistently having to “pay for the sins of our fathers” as “every time we turn around it’s something that occurred 20 years ago”. He showed a commitment to shouldering this burden as the nature of the job is “24/7”. Council members Burns and Stagg offered their own hyperbolic statements as Betsy Stagg agreed that the working conditions in the DPW facility were “terrible” and a “disaster”, while Don Burns offered his own estimation that 850,000 dollars is “a far cry from a million dollars”.
Borough Administrator Richard Kunze, while not offering the same sense of dramatics, appeared to allow his low-talker tendencies to work to his own benefit while discussing particular budget items related to his office. Specifically, the need for the borough to purchase two replacement vehicles for cars deemed to be in marginal to very poor condition. One vehicle, it was explained, is used by the municipality for tasks such as water meter reading; there seemed to be a lack of clarity as to the purpose of the second vehicle as the explanation trailed off into something about “seminars”.
The tennis court project was discussed, and then put to the side so the council could continue covering other subjects. As the attempt to address items in order began, the first topic was the need for a network upgrade for borough facilities. Richard Kunze wants one central network for all borough facilities which would connect via a virtual private network. There were complaints about intermittent internet outages for the borough offices, and an overall unstable network. He questioned whether the town’s IT consultant was correct with the problem being associated with old wiring; but he did not publicly indicate what consultant had offered the proposed recommendation, what the price tag for the project might be, or explain how efficiency would be improved.
Council member Stagg discussed $600,000 budgeted for drilling a back-up well on the north end of town. She described Well#8 as being critical to the town’s water supply, and as the table water drops it creates conditions that might lead to a critical situation were the well to fail. She offered that the project could safely be put off for another year, but accepted Council member Di Pentima’s suggestion to take the money out of the water budget rather then add it to the capitol improvement budget. Water was also the issue regarding the immediate needs of the DPW as state mandates require a water reclamation facility for washing vehicles. The need to keep the vehicles clean is not based on looks, but is rather to prevent corrosion caused primarily by road salt. The majority of the proposed capitol improvements for DPW facilities was cut, but the Council apportioned $300,000 for the reclamation project and any minimal improvements that can be made with those funds.
The DPW representative addressed the tennis court issue to a limited extent. In response to considerations that Wyckoff’s DPW had been able to do a lot of the work involved in the construction of their new tennis courts, he clarified for the council and residents that the neighboring township has a different level of equipment. He offered that the department would assist in any manner that was appropriate, but they did not possess the necessary hardware. As the DPW failed to bring their own horn to tout at the meeting, it should be noted that their employees assist many civic organizations throughout town in the production of public events and beautification projects.
The Volunteer Fire Department was seeking funds to: fix the floors in the firehouse by laying a layer of epoxy, replace a siren system, and improved security for the firehouse. The security issue, which carried a $14,000 price tag, involved the installation of a “card key” system to replace the traditional locks. It was presented to the council as a matter arising out of homeland security guidelines that suggest electronic access will allow administrators to restrict access without the need for retrieving keys which may have been copied. As a volunteer department, it was felt that having greater control over entry by former members is an issue to be addressed. The Police Department’s capitol expenditures were justified with a similar argument made by The Volunteer Fire Department in that no improvements have been made to the building in over thirty years. There were a lack of specifics, but it appeared there were issues with the drywall deteriorating along with the building’s original wallpaper. The price tag mentioned was $28,000 for wall repairs using a plastics solution which should require no future maintenance.
The budget for the repavement of Lawlor Drive, with a price tag of $300,000, was also discussed. Betsy Stagg raised the issue of putting this project on hold. The concern is that heavy equipment traversing the area during the proposed tennis court construction could damage the repaved road. Council member Stagg, also up for re-election, offered her own proposal on the tennis court project which would look to reduce costs by preserving as much infrastructure as possible. In what was described as a arranging the courts in sets of two, rather than three, the town could keep the existing lighting and fencing, and still offer the necessary improvements sought in the original proposal.
The discussions on the tennis court proposal continued, and it became evident that the Council was progressing without a full understanding of the situation. Although core testing was previously requested so a clearer understanding of the substrata might be available, the Borough Administrator has held off in authorizing this for budgetary reasons until a final plan, and location, were decided on by the Council. The acoustics made it difficult to hear what the actual cost for an additional core test might have been, but it appeared this lack of information was making an informed decision more difficult for some council members.
The final segment of the meeting dealt with the debt financing required. The town’s CFO advised that the economic situation was not conducive to the sale of municipal bonds, and that options would need to be limited to short-term notes which may later be turned over into long term debt financing. Council member Di Pentima suggested that any approval on capitol expenditures include a provision to prevent the expenditure of any new monies till 2009. This accounting maneuver would defer payments further into the future when financial projections indicate the town will be more liquid. The CFO reported a going rate of 4% on short term financing, with no principal payments required for the first two year.
In the end, the only reductions publicly agreed upon were with regard to planned improvements to the DPW facilities. The original proposal was deemed fiscally untenable under the present conditions and was agreed upon prior to the open meeting. The Council adjourned with the intention of assuming all discussed projects would proceed as planned. The council reserved the right to terminate or alter plans as circumstances change for each project; this would include the tennis project with various Council members and residents proposing budgets ranging from $440,000 to $850,000. This decision moves the process forward with ordinances being prepared for the next regular meeting where the Council will approve debt financing for approximately 1.8 million dollars.
Video Music Guessing Game
What is the name of the 1970’s super group performing live for the first time in the video below?
Hint: The name of the group is something most Americans no longer have in government.